Payments are on the way except for kirby.com, whom I haven't heard from yet on a mailing address. I made one correction. SilverArmy gets $180 instead of $120 for 3rd place. I'm using a new billpayer service from my bank, so I'm not sure if there might be a delay. The date shown is 2/11/2015, but if that's the date you can expect the check or the date it gets mailed, I'm not sure.

There was the risk of the interception when calling the passing play, but that would be balanced against the risk of Lynch fumbling. Lynch had 4 fumbles in 280 attempts (0.14 fumbles per attempt) compared to Wilson's 7 INT's in 452 passing attempts (0.15 INT's per pass attempt) in the 2014 regular season. There was the risk of offensive holding, but that happens on running plays, too. Speaking of holding penalties, any penalty results in lost time since the clock doesn't get reset just because the down gets replayed. Even more reason to try to preserve that last timeout.

I'm not saying calling the pass play was the smart thing to do, I'm just saying the criticism is too extreme. There were valid reasons for attempting the strategy that was used. If this had happened in the 1st quarter I don't think anybody would even be talking about it, at least not so much from the angle of it being such a dumb play call.

Mean Mark: I couldn't disagree more with the play call. I think it's laughable for Carroll to suggest that it was essentially wasting a play or time off the clock. I do agree that you should not weigh the decision on the results and that it's human nature to do that and then pile on.

In this case, though, you have a strong case that it was simply a bad decision before they even snapped the ball -- given the probabilities of success and the risks for his different options. Carroll chose to run a pass play -- bringing into play a sack, sack/fumble, interception, offensive penalty for holding/pass interference, all sorts of bad things. Not only that, but the play that was called went to a receiver that had caught 11 passes all season. I'm not surprised that he made a weak attempt to catch the pass in that pressure situation and the DB was able to fight thru him for the interception.

Now compare that to the main option everyone in the stadium and watching on TV expected Carroll to go to -- run Lynch again. You say he failed to score on the previous play. He gained 4 YARDS on the previous play and was stopped at the 1. At that point, he could practically spin once and fall forward and likely score. He averaged over 4 yards a carry for the game and had already scored from the 3 yd line in the first half.

What do people always say when the game is on the line? You go with your best players, put the ball in their hands, go with what got you there. That works. The Seahawks should have tried it. Worst case, you get stopped, maybe lose a few yards, take your timeout, then try 2 more pass plays to score -- and if you lose, you lose knowing you took your best shot to win and the Patriots were simply better. Instead, you lost and you feel like you gave it away and didn't take the easy shot to win.

I agree also that Wilson deserves more blame for throwing the pick (and eyeballing the receiver the whole way). But I think Carroll deserves all the crap he is, admittedly, accepting for the play call.

I think the criticism of Pete Carroll about the decision to pass instead of run has been way over the top. Would running Lynch have been a better move? Probably so, but he was trying to get 3 more plays in with just :26 seconds left. A quick pass into the endzone on 2nd down would preserve the final timeout and leave additional options open on 3rd and 4th downs.

The fact the play didn't work means nothing as to the merits of the decision in the first place. It's human nature to judge the decision based on the results, which is usually a good thing, but in this case I think it leads us astray. Blame the poor execution and credit the defense for making the play rather than blaming the play call itself.

Remember, they had run Lynch on 1st down, and he had failed to get in. Furthermore, they had run Lynch on 1-yard to go situations earlier in the year and he was something like 0 for 5 in those situations.

I actually respect Carroll more now for trying to take the heat for the decision and taking some of it off his quarterback, but the reality is Wilson threw the pick, not Carroll.

Today's color scheme honors the New England Patriots, whose team colors we are using today are NAUTICAL BLUE and NEW CENTURY SILVER.

Congrats to the Patriots for winning another Superbowl and congrats to the winners of the Lock Club:

1) UnderDawgz = $720
2) Eugenius = $300
3) SilverArmy = $120

Booby Prize = $75 to be split evenly between Mean Mark and kirby.com ($37.50 each). Hate to admit it, but I honestly tried to pick a win every week, even to the last.

To the winners: e-mail me (mwgansonAThotmail) your current mailing addresses so I can know where to send your payments. I'll try to get them out on Friday. That will give me a chance to make any necessary corrections to the standings before sending them out. If I made a mistake in the standings I need to know about it before Friday, or else if it cost you money you'll need to try to collect from the other players once I've mailed out the checks.

deflate gate is just something to keep the super bowl hype going. three weeks from now no one will care. As you know they don't change balls every time they change sides, (ie: a4th down kick) then both teams would have had to use the same balls. Just a little common since says this is hype for the media.

John, I'm not sure who actually supplies the balls for the games. There is a rule on nfl.com that states the home team supplies 24 balls for indoor games and 36 for outdoor games, which seems to imply both teams use the same balls during the game. My inclination is to believe this whole story is being blown way out of proportion.

One thing I can't figure out is why not just let the teams use whatever inflation psi suits them? The NFL is always coming up with new rules to favor offenses and more points being scored because it helps the ratings and ticket sales when more points are being scored. I say let each team air the balls up to whatever psi suits them. This is not to say the Patriots should not be punished if it is found they violated the rule currently in effect. I'm just saying the rule doesn't make sense and goes against well-established doctrine of rule changing to benefit offenses over the years.

Well Mr.Brady did not say much . But if I were he I would have said...hey look I do not carry the bag of balls with me wherever I go before and during the game .What was everyone expecting , that he would say yes I told so and so to take a little air out of them at halftime?

I do believe him though when he says he didn't notice any difference in the 2nd half . In that weather with all else going on in the game I do not think a quarterback would notice a small deflation .

However he might have said that in pregame ball prep I probably would have known but that would really have opened a can of worms! I think anyone with 2 footballs at home can put the theory to a test.

Mark: Funny you should say that , My 17 year old son said the same thing .

I suppose because Football is unique (other than Cricket and of course Baseball) cannot think of another team sport where one side only tries to score and the other to prevent scoring at any one time.

Thus perhaps what is not fair is the coin toss. If there was another way to determine first possesion ie most yards in regulation or team that scored the tying points first. Who knows?

The other thing which maybe the NFL has stats on is percentage of victory by the team winning the toss. If infact it is close to 50-50 then I really have no case.Maybe it became more equal with the first possesion TD rule rather than just the first score.

On what the line should be, the Seahawks were -1 in the opening line, but it moved to a pick'em shortly after. I think the Patriots' beatdown of the Colts and the Seahawks barely winning in overtime combined to move the line a little bit as bettors place a lot of emphasis on what happened in the most recent games.

If you were told New England would score 45 points the OVER would have been a no-brainer. All this talk about deflated balls, but the bottom line is Indy only put up 7 points in the whole game.

John:

My first inclination was to say Green Bay had the option of playing some defense, but maybe you're right. Maybe both teams should get at least one go on offense no matter what. Seems every rule change that comes down tends to favor offenses.

I don't think there are any provisions for a 2nd halftime. I'm thinking what happens if the score is still tied at the end of the first overtime, is they just start all over again with another coin toss and another overtime session.